Dismissed

Ms Laxmi Balaji Marketing v. Icici Bank Limited

DRT7 Aug 2026SA/461/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act was dismissed. The Tribunal held that the respondent bank had strictly complied with all procedural mandates regarding demand notices, possession notices, publication in newspapers, and physical affixture, rejecting the applicant's claims of non-compliance and alleged illegal NPA classification.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; no relief granted to the applicant; interlocutory applications pending, if any, stand closed.

Ms Laxmi Balaji Marketing versus Icici Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Securitization Application No. 461 OF 2025

¶5

M/s Laxmi Balaji Marketing, Rep. by its Prop Subramanyam Vanjivaka, Situated at Flat No. 103, H. No. 2-46/1, Indur Kalanjali Hasmathpet Village, Old Bowenpally, Hyderabad - 500 011 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

ICICI Bank Limited, Rep. by its authorized officer, Situated at 4/10, Mythree Tower, Bommanhalli, Hosur Main Road, Bangalore - 560068

¶8

.....Respondent

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s. Raghavulu Devalla Counsel for Respondent : Mr. G. Adrian Kiran Raj

¶10

-:ORDER:-

¶11

The present Securitization Application is filed by the Applicant u/s.17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ("Act" hereinafter for short) to set aside all the measures initiated by the respondent, including the action of taking physical possession of the SA schedule property via advocate commissioner notice dated 13.10.2025 as per orders in Crl.M.P.No.77 of 2025 on the file of Hon'ble Additional Senior Civil Judge cum Additional Chief ludicial Magistrate, MedchalMalkajgiri District pursuant to /+he possession notice dated r2,o6.2ozs. ffix*

¶12

Page 2 of 5

¶13

SA No.46U2025

¶14

The averments of the application, in brief, are^{that applicant} had availed an Overdraft loan facility of^{Rs.90,00,000/-from the} respondent bank in the^year 2019 for the^{development of his} marketing business by mortgaging the^{scheduleproperties. It is} contended that due to^{severe financial setbackssuffered duringthe} COVID-19^{pandemic,the applicant defaulted in repaymentof the loan} despite having^paid a substantial^{amount towardsinterest and} repeatedly approaching the^{respondent bank for regularisationof the} account through an OTS.^{The applicant alleges that the respondent} bank illegally classified the^{loan account as a NPA,not on accountof} any default on his^part but^{due to the bank's failure to renew the} account in accordance^{with the RBI guidelines. It is further contended} that the respondent bank initiated^{proceedingsunder the SARFAESI} Act by issuing the Demand Notice under^{Section13(2) and the} Possession Notice dated 72.06.2025 under^{Section13(4) without} complying with the mandatory^{provisions of the Act and the Security} Interest^{(Enforcement) Rules, 2002, (hereinafter "Rules"for short)} inasmuch as the Possession^{Notice was neither affixedon the secured} asset nor^published in two^{newspapersas required under Rules 8(1)} and 8(2). The applicant further^{alleges that the respondentbank} obtained an order under^{Section 14 of the SARFAESIAct fromthe} learned Chief ludicial lYagistrate, Guntur,^{without makingfull} disclosure of the^{paymentsalready made by the applicantand} without complying with the^{mandatory requirementsof Section 14 of} the Act. On these^{grounds, Applicant seek to set aside of the} SARFAESI measures^{initiated againstthe S.A. Schedule Property.}

¶15

The Respondent Bank filed^{its reply statement alongwith} supporting documents. The averments^{thereof,in brief, are that} though an Overdraft facillty^{was sanctioned to the applicant in 2019} by creating security over the^{schedule propertJ, the applicant}

¶16

Page 3 of5

¶17

SA No. 451/202s

¶18

committed persistent defaults in repayment, resulting in the loan account being rightly classified as a NPA. It is further contended that the respondent strictly complied with the provisions of the SARFAESI Act by issuing the Demand Notice under Section 13(2), followed by the Possession Notice dated 72.06.2025 under Section 13(4), which were duly served, affixed on the secured asset and published in English and vernacular newspapers in compliance with Rules 8(1) and 8(2) of the Rules, 2002. The respondent further submits that, upon continued default, it obtained an order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in Crl.M.P,No.77 of 2025 from the competent Magistrate, pursuant to which an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take physical possession of the secured asset after granting the applicant time to vacate. Accordingly, the Respondent Bank prays for dismissal of the SA.

¶19

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that orders may be passed based on record. Learned counsel for the respondent bank filed written arguments. Perused the written arguments filed by the respondent and also perused the material brought on record.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Respondent Bank denied the averments of the Applicant and places reliance upon the material papers annexed with the reply statement. It is submitted that the Applicant' account was classified as NPA in accordance with RBI guidelines and that the Respondent Bank had strictly followed the due procedure prescribed under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and the Rules framed thereunder. Accordingly, sought for dlsmissal of the S.A.

¶21

The points for consideration are as follows : -

¶22

¶23

i) Whether Applicant made out any valid ground for quashing the action of the Respondent-Bank for taking the

Ory*#

Page 4 of 5

sA No.46U2025

physicat possession of the SA schedule^{propertythrough} Advocate Commissioner^{appointedunder the provision of} the Section 14 of the^SARFESIAct?

¶28

ii) To what relief?

¶29

Point No.(i):

¶30

The Respondent Bank^{filed material documentsas proof of} compliance of due^{procedureof law. Pages1 to 19 of the material} paper annexed with the reply statement are the^{Photostat copies of} postal receipts, tracking reports and^{publication of the same in} English and Telugu^{(vernacular language)newspaperson 02'04'2025} proving service of demand notice dated 01.03.2025.^{Similarly,Pages} 20 lo 42 are the Photostat^{copies of postal receipt of Possession} Notice dated 06.06.2025,^{photographsas proof of affixture on} secured assets and^{publication of the same in Englishand Telugu} (vernacular language) newspapers on^{t2'06.2025. In view of} sufficient^{proof place on record, I find no infractionof section13(2) &} 13(4) of the Act and^{Rules3, 8(1) & B(2) of the Rules, 2002' Asa} secured creditor the^{Respondent Bank initiated the SARFESI} proceedings, which cannot be categorized^{as illegal or arbitrary'}

¶31

In view of above observation,^{it is concludedthat the Applicant} failed to establish any^{ground to interdict the measures initiated} Respondent Bank under the^{Act, 2002 againstthe SA schedule} property and accordingly the SA^{is liable to be dismissed'}

¶32

Point No.(ii):

¶33